TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 919
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ratan Barik, Adv. Mr. Bishwaraj Agarwal, Adv. JUDGMENT JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J. :- 1. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the learned Judge failed to take into consideration the fact that relevant documents submitted by the appellant had not been considered by the Principal Commissioner, CGST, Bolpur Commissionerate. 2. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the learned Si....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant submitted relevant documents before the adjudicating authority in support of his plea that the services were exempted from tax in view of the aforesaid exemption notification. However, the adjudicating authority completely glossed over the said documents submitted the appellant/assesssee and hold as follows:- " .....I find that river Protection/Improvement work is not an exempted service....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant claiming exemption with regard to the services which were the subject matter of adjudication. This amounts to a manifest error apparent on the face of the records which has rendered the decision making amenable to judicial review. Existence of alternative remedy is a self-imposed restriction and does not divest a Court of its extraordinary powers under Articles 226 of the Constitution of Indi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s related to protection/improvement work in river bank which is not eligible for exemption. As the documents submitted by the appellant assessee had not been considered, he submits in the event the assessee deposits 7.5% of the tax assessed in the impugned order, the order may remain suspended and the matter be remanded for fresh reconsideration in light of the documents furnished by the assessee.....